Patsy involved = BDI

[FY1234]

I first became interested in this case when all the 20th anniversary TV specials started airing and watched all of them. Then I read every book on the subject and did lots of research.

IDI makes no sense whatsoever, PDI means JDI not involved at all and he is definitely involved in the staging etc. and JDI means PDI not knowing nor involved. That leaves BDI with both parents staging etc.

I went back and forth between JDI and BDI (with parents staging etc). I read all the posts on Solving the JonBenet Ramsey Case where the administrator believes JDI and thinks John was brainwashing Patsy into lying etc. and he makes alot of great points except in order for the JDI theory to work Patsy could not have known anything on the 26th.

First of all Patsy's timeline of that morning doesn't make any sense. She said she woke up around 533a put on makeup, got dressed, fussed with a jumper in the laundry area, found the note, ran upstairs to John and called 911 at 552a. It would have taken her at least 15 minutes to get dressed and put on makeup alone.

How did Patsy know who signed the note if she only read the first few lines, she was on the phone by the wall while John was on the floor a few feet away reading the note but was able to say it was signed SBTC to the 911 operator.

If Patsy did not know the body was in the basement on the morning of the 26th then why did she watch Officer French with splayed fingers when he came up from the basement that morning?

When a photo copy of the ransom note was passed around that morning why did Patsy say the paper looked familiar? It was a photocopy!

 

[Cottonstar]

I first became interested in this case when all the 20th anniversary TV specials started airing and watched all of them. Then I read every book on the subject and did lots of research.

IDI makes no sense whatsoever, PDI means JDI not involved at all and he is definitely involved in the staging etc. and JDI means PDI not knowing nor involved. That leaves BDI with both parents staging etc.

I went back and forth between JDI and BDI (with parents staging etc). I read all the posts on Solving the JonBenet Ramsey Case where the administrator believes JDI and thinks John was brainwashing Patsy into lying etc. and he makes alot of great points except in order for the JDI theory to work Patsy could not have known anything on the 26th.

First of all Patsy's timeline of that morning doesn't make any sense. She said she woke up around 533a put on makeup, got dressed, fussed with a jumper in the laundry area, found the note, ran upstairs to John and called 911 at 552a. It would have taken her at least 15 minutes to get dressed and put on makeup alone.

How did Patsy know who signed the note if she only read the first few lines, she was on the phone by the wall while John was on the floor a few feet away reading the note but was able to say it was signed SBTC to the 911 operator.

If Patsy did not know the body was in the basement on the morning of the 26th then why did she watch Officer French with splayed fingers when he came up from the basement that morning?

When a photo copy of the ransom note was passed around that morning why did Patsy say the paper looked familiar? It was a photocopy!

Very good conclusions based on the evidence. Both JR and PR were in on the cover-up from the get.

 

[UKGuy]

I first became interested in this case when all the 20th anniversary TV specials started airing and watched all of them. Then I read every book on the subject and did lots of research.

IDI makes no sense whatsoever, PDI means JDI not involved at all and he is definitely involved in the staging etc. and JDI means PDI not knowing nor involved. That leaves BDI with both parents staging etc.

I went back and forth between JDI and BDI (with parents staging etc). I read all the posts on Solving the JonBenet Ramsey Case where the administrator believes JDI and thinks John was brainwashing Patsy into lying etc. and he makes alot of great points except in order for the JDI theory to work Patsy could not have known anything on the 26th.

First of all Patsy's timeline of that morning doesn't make any sense. She said she woke up around 533a put on makeup, got dressed, fussed with a jumper in the laundry area, found the note, ran upstairs to John and called 911 at 552a. It would have taken her at least 15 minutes to get dressed and put on makeup alone.

How did Patsy know who signed the note if she only read the first few lines, she was on the phone by the wall while John was on the floor a few feet away reading the note but was able to say it was signed SBTC to the 911 operator.

If Patsy did not know the body was in the basement on the morning of the 26th then why did she watch Officer French with splayed fingers when he came up from the basement that morning?

When a photo copy of the ransom note was passed around that morning why did Patsy say the paper looked familiar? It was a photocopy!

FY1234,
If the case were PDI, why would Patsy stage herself, via forensic evidence, into the wine-cellar crime-scene? Much better if JonBenet was left in her bedroom where as Patsy claimed she undressed JonBenet for bed.

So I reckon Patsy is staging for someone else, i.e. JR or BR?

A critical piece of evidence is that JonBenet was acutely sexually assaulted. Three different medical opinions support this view, including that of Coroner Meyer.

The latter observation suggests JDI or BDI. If its JDI did JR deliberately inject BR into the case by dressing JonBenet in the size-12's and Burke's longjohns?

Or do fibers from JR's Israeli manufactured shirt left in JonBenet's size-12's just mean he wiped her down, to mask the sexual assault?

Can a case be made for both parents staging Burke out of the case?

If you are a parent wishing to stage a crime-scene so its reflects a normal domestic scenario, then surely you want JonBenet to be dressed in her pajamas or nightgown?

All this requires, after cleaning up JonBenet, is a quick visit to her bathroom drawer to select some suitable nightwear, then you can say JonBenet got dressed for bed had a snack then retired to bed, that was the last time we saw her.

Instead what we get is JonBenet still wearing her White Gap Top, Burke's longjohns, and a pair of size-12's, many sizes too large.

Now Patsy has an explanation for all this, how much of it do you believe? Consider JR, I never touched JonBenet, I left the undressing to Patsy, yet his fibers are in the size-12's !

This points to the parents being confronted that morning by a faite accompli, or a done deal. Due to rigor mortis etc they did not attempt to redress JonBenet, Burke had already done that.

So they moved her body down to the basement staged a crime-scene, cleaned up her bedroom, then after a bit revised the crime-scene to that of a kidnapping.


Neither parent was known to be violent towards JonBenet, neither parent needed to use physical force to make JonBenet compliant.

So although BDI is a good fit for the known crime-scene, it's still mostly all speculation and the case might actually be PDI or JDI, particularly the latter as JR continues to make new claims regularly, e.g. the flashlight, despite saying originally it was not theirs.

 

[fr brown]

....IDI makes no sense whatsoever, PDI means JDI not involved at all and he is definitely involved in the staging etc. and JDI means PDI not knowing nor involved. That leaves BDI with both parents staging etc....

What makes you say that John was definitely involved in the staging?

We don't know for sure about this case because they haven't told us, but cops generally look for evidence that corroborates alibis. They probably checked John's shower and sink to see if they were wet. Patsy's, no doubt, were bone-dry. Steve Thomas and James Kolar both concluded that John slept through the night.

 

[andreww]

What makes you say that John was definitely involved in the staging?

We don't know for sure about this case because they haven't told us, but cops generally look for evidence that corroborates alibis. They probably checked John's shower and sink to see if they were wet. Patsy's, no doubt, were bone-dry. Steve Thomas and James Kolar both concluded that John slept through the night.

Been a while since I looked in to this case intensely, but I came in to it believing like you that John may have woken up with no knowledge of what had happened. Then I read the police interview and realized there were several glaring inconsistencies in his statements. Its been a few years but the one that I remember most was that John was on his knees in his underwear as Patsy was on the phone to 911. When the first officer arrived less than five minutes later, John was fully dressed, but also claimed that he had checked all the doors in the house and also made a trip out to the garage to check that door. All in less than five minutes? He also ordered his pilot to ready the plane for a trip to Atlanta, then told police he had a business meeting that he couldn't miss. Strange since his original destination that day was Michigan. There are tons of other things that I just can't recall, but bottom line is I came to the undeniable conclusion that John definitely had to know what was going on that morning.

 

[Cottonstar]

What makes you say that John was definitely involved in the staging?

We don't know for sure about this case because they haven't told us, but cops generally look for evidence that corroborates alibis. They probably checked John's shower and sink to see if they were wet. Patsy's, no doubt, were bone-dry. Steve Thomas and James Kolar both concluded that John slept through the night.

Perhaps in their narratives that they composed 10-20 years ago. This is no longer the case. The CBS reinvestigation affirmed that JR was involved in the staging from the beginning. Without JR, the cover-up doesn’t even get off the ground.

 

[fr brown]

Been a while since I looked in to this case intensely, but I came in to it believing like you that John may have woken up with no knowledge of what had happened. Then I read the police interview and realized there were several glaring inconsistencies in his statements. Its been a few years but the one that I remember most was that John was on his knees in his underwear as Patsy was on the phone to 911. When the first officer arrived less than five minutes later, John was fully dressed, but also claimed that he had checked all the doors in the house and also made a trip out to the garage to check that door. All in less than five minutes? He also ordered his pilot to ready the plane for a trip to Atlanta, then told police he had a business meeting that he couldn't miss. Strange since his original destination that day was Michigan. There are tons of other things that I just can't recall, but bottom line is I came to the undeniable conclusion that John definitely had to know what was going on that morning.

Putting on shirt, pants, loafers(?) and checking the doors on the first floor, to me that sounds doable in a hurry. Plus we only have an approximate time of arrival for French.

Certainly John would have become suspicious of Patsy pretty quickly. For one thing, she looked like she'd been up all night. Then Patsy told John, who told French, that she found the ransom note at the bottom of the stairs, but when French got there it was over by the patio door. Neither John or Patsy admitted to moving it over to the door, about ten feet away from the stairs. If John didn't move it there (and he didn't say he did), he would know that Patsy was lying--either about where she found it or about moving it. John eventually said that he moved it, but that's not what he told French that morning. (The only independent witnesses we have saw the note by the patio door. There's nothing indicating it was ever anywhere else.)

So John's suspicions about the "kidnapping" would have been aroused early. According to Arndt, he was calm and making jokes when she first got there, suggesting he thought it was some kind of a prank. Then he disappeared for a while and was thereafter preoccupied and nervous. (That last bit is Steve Thomas's contribution. Arndt's report isn't clear about when he became nervous, just that he did.)

Once John found the body, he would know that Patsy (or Burke) had done something horrible. But he wouldn't even be able to ask until they were alone.

 

[andreww]

Putting on shirt, pants, loafers(?) and checking the doors on the first floor, to me that sounds doable in a hurry. Plus we only have an approximate time of arrival for French.

Certainly John would have become suspicious of Patsy pretty quickly. For one thing, she looked like she'd been up all night. Then Patsy told John, who told French, that she found the ransom note at the bottom of the stairs, but when French got there it was over by the patio door. Neither John or Patsy admitted to moving it over to the door, about ten feet away from the stairs. If John didn't move it there (and he didn't say he did), he would know that Patsy was lying--either about where she found it or about moving it. John eventually said that he moved it, but that's not what he told French that morning. (The only independent witnesses we have saw the note by the patio door. There's nothing indicating it was ever anywhere else.)

So John's suspicions about the "kidnapping" would have been aroused early. According to Arndt, he was calm and making jokes when she first got there, suggesting he thought it was some kind of a prank. Then he disappeared for a while and was thereafter preoccupied and nervous. (That last bit is Steve Thomas's contribution. Arndt's report isn't clear about when he became nervous, just that he did.)

Once John found the body, he would know that Patsy (or Burke) had done something horrible. But he wouldn't even be able to ask until they were alone.

The 911 call was placed at 5:52 and lasted almost a minute and a half. French arrived at 5:59.

 

[andreww]

And BTW, John said he got out of bed and left Patsy sleeping. If in fact Patsy was up all night, never changing her clothes, then John is lying right from the get go isn't he?

 

[FY1234]

The ransom note has sayings from several different movies like Dirty Harry etc and John was a movie buff so he was for sure involved in what to write in the ransom note.

 

[fr brown]

The 911 call was placed at 5:52 and lasted almost a minute and a half. French arrived at 5:59.

Actually his report says he responded at approximately 0555. Where does it say he arrived at 5:59? I don't see that information in there. (And it would still be approximate, wouldn't it?)

If he started checking doors when Patsy got on the phone, he'd have seven minutes by your reckoning.

 

[fr brown]

And BTW, John said he got out of bed and left Patsy sleeping. If in fact Patsy was up all night, never changing her clothes, then John is lying right from the get go isn't he?

When did he say that? In his first police interview, April '97? I don't see it in French's or Arndt's reports of the 26th. It could be in there, though. Arndt's is pretty long and I haven't read every word.

 

[fr brown]

The ransom note has sayings from several different movies like Dirty Harry etc and John was a movie buff so he was for sure involved in what to write in the ransom note.

I venture that many wives are familiar with favorite movies of husbands (and children). Probably a lot of women like Clint Eastwood.

I don't think you have to be a movie buff to know Dirty Harry.

 

[fr brown]

Perhaps in their narratives that they composed 10-20 years ago. This is no longer the case. The CBS reinvestigation affirmed that JR was involved in the staging from the beginning. Without JR, the cover-up doesn’t even get off the ground.

Now I know you're pulling my leg.

 

[andreww]

When did he say that? In his first police interview, April '97? I don't see it in French's or Arndt's reports of the 26th. It could be in there, though. Arndt's is pretty long and I haven't read every word.

16 LOU SMIT: Did you see your wife get up that

17 morning?

18 JOHN RAMSEY: No.

19 LOU SMIT: So you had already been in the bathroom

20 when she got up?

21 JOHN RAMSEY: Right.

 

[fr brown]

16 LOU SMIT: Did you see your wife get up that

17 morning?

18 JOHN RAMSEY: No.

19 LOU SMIT: So you had already been in the bathroom

20 when she got up?

21 JOHN RAMSEY: Right.

You said that John was "lying right from the get go." That interview was almost a year and a half after the murder.

John said essentially the same thing just a few months after the murder, in his first interview. And it was one of the written questions given his lawyers by the police sometime in January of '97.

The question should be: what did John say about it on the morning of the 26th? As far as I can tell, he wasn't even asked.

 

[Cottonstar]

I venture that many wives are familiar with favorite movies of husbands (and children). Probably a lot of women like Clint Eastwood.

I don't think you have to be a movie buff to know Dirty Harry.

I venture Patsy did not. JR was the movie buff. Patsy was 14, when Dirty Harry came out.

You have to be deeply immersed in a suspension of disbelief for your PDIALL theory to have any legs.

The 911 call, which has JR, PR, and BR all conversating in the background is evidence that all Ramseys were involved long before 5:52am.

 

[fr brown]

I venture Patsy did not. JR was the movie buff. Patsy was 14, when Dirty Harry came out.

You have to be deeply immersed in a suspension of disbelief for your PDIALL theory to have any legs.

The 911 call, which has JR, PR, and BR all conversating in the background is evidence that all Ramseys were involved long before 5:52am.

It was John's An Officer and a Gentleman poster in the basement? Did not know that. Also a Bette Midler and Hercule Poirot fan, I guess.

14 yo's don't watch movies? Don't know what's playing at the theaters? Not my personal experience of parenthood.

And, of course, the conversation you reference took place (if it did) after the 911 call. We know John was downstairs before that. I have no problem with Burke being awake and there. It would be hard to sleep through the uproar. It doesn't mean he was awake all night.

 

[fr brown]

Not to mention that Dirty Harry was released on VHS a few years after it was in theaters. No doubt it was on cable sometime later and probably, edited for language and content, on broadcast channels at a later date. (Not going to pursue that myself.) It's been an iconic film forever.

Maybe Burke and his friends liked to quote from it.

 

[Cottonstar]

Not to mention that Dirty Harry was released on VHS a few years after it was in theaters. No doubt it was on cable sometime later and probably, edited for language and content, on broadcast channels at a later date. (Not going to pursue that myself.) It's been an iconic film forever.

Maybe Burke and his friends liked to quote from it.

Dirty Harry was released in 1971. Most people didn’t have VCRs until the late 80’s. There is more than just one line or reference from that movie-as you well know. JR lied to investigators when he mentioned that he had seen the movie “Speed”, but it was on an airplane and I didn’t listen to the sound. Ya, ok. Kinda convienant? .

That’s like saying- Yes, it was me who stole a cookie from the cookie jar, however I didn’t eat the cookie.